Hello everyone,I'm reading Nepos's life of Lysander at the moment and I'm having problems with the first paragraph.<br /><br />My first problem is in this part:<br /><br />Lysander Lacedaemonius magnam reliquit sui famam, magis felicitate quam virtute partam. Atheniensis enim in Peloponnesios sexto et vicesimo anno bellum gerentes confecisse apparet. id qua ratione consecutus sit, non latet.<br /><br />What is the subject of apparet? Is it impersonal? In which case I make the sentence: It appears that the Athenians had completed a 26th year of waging war against the Peloponnesians. <br /><br />However, if that is the correct meaning, the next sentence, where I think Lysander is the subject means the whole passage seems (to me at any rate) to involve rather an abrupt switching back and forth of subject. If Lysander is also the subject of apparet, then I don't see where the subject accusative and infinitive fits in.<br /><br />Why is consecutus sit in the subjunctive? I make the sentence: By what means he achieved this is not obscure. <br /><br />Next problem: <br /><br />hac victoria Lysander elatus, cum antea semper factiosus audaxque fuisset, sic sibi indulsit, ut eius opera in maximum odium Graeciae Lacedaemonii pervenerint. <br /><br />My problem is with eius opera. If Lacedeamonii is the subject of pervenerint, how does eius opera fit in? I would have expected eius operibus as an ablative of cause.<br /><br />Last one:<br /><br />namque undique qui Atheniensium rebus studuissent, eiectis, decem delegerat in una quaque civitate, quibus summum imperium potestatemque omnium rerum committeret. horum in numerum nemo admittebatur, nisi qui aut eius hospitio contineretur aut se illius fore proprium fide confirmarat. <br /><br />My problem is with the part in bold. I can't keep straight who eius, se, and illius each refers to. And what does proprium go with?[<br /><br />]The full context can be seen here: <br />http://www.fh-augsburg.de/~harsch/n_vir306.html<br /><br />Am I being over-ambitious in trying to read this, or is it actually very difficult?<br /> ???

Last edited by Sync100 on Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

id qua ratione consecutus sit non latet = "It is not unknown what was the reason he should/might have pulled it off", I think (he wasn't able to succeed before so obviously it wouldn't have been thanks to him that he should do so) —subjunctive because a question clause// subjunctivo modo quod quaestio, ut opinor

nisi qui aut eius hospitio contineretur aut se illius fore proprium fide confirmarat.=unless one who was sustained by his patronage/hospitality or who would have sworn himself to thereafter belong to him (sworn to be going to be one of his own men)

Lysander the Lacedaemonian left behind a great reputation [opinion of himself], more by luck than by merit. For he seems to have defeated the Athenians waging war against the Peloponnesian in the 26th year [of the war]. By what means he achieved this [subjunctive because it is an indirect question] is not clear.

Elated by this victory, Lysander , while he had always been aggressively partisan [factiosus] and presumptuous [audax], indulged himself to such an extent [Lewis & Short: "took such liberties"] that by his agency [through his fault, on account of his activities; opera mea, tua, eius is an idiom] the Lacedaemonians came into the greatest hatred of Greece [subjective genitive, i.e., they became extremely detested by the rest of Greece].

For everywhere, those who favored Athenian policies having been expelled, he delegated ten men in each city-state to whom he [Lysander] committed the highest dominion and power over all things. No one was allowed to become part of [was admitted to] this group [in numerum eorum], except someone who was bound by his [Lysander's] patronage [eius [Lysander's] hospito contineretur] or who had confirmed by faithfulness that he [the subject, se in indirect speech] would belong to him [Lysander, proprium illius]. [The last clause is a little obscure to me., but that's the general drift: Lysander appointed only men who had confirmed that they would be his men.]